So often you read how as you level the power spell casters gain grows far faster than that of martial classes. Would either of the following work to control that imbalance?
High casting ability scores do 2 main things..
1) Take away the extra spells/day they normally grant.
2) Use static save DC's
1. Your DC's can be increased, making your spells difficult to resist but you don't get any more than you class chart states.
2. You can have extra spells per day but the DC's are always the same. Maybe use 4 or 5 as the static score.
Is the combination of these abilities the main reason casters are 'best' ? What are we assuming when we make this statement? DM's are always honest and never fudge rolls (especially vs save or suck spells cast round one of combat vs the BBEG) . High save DC's make it too easy to succeed?
What are your experiences of being a spell caster, do you always 'win' ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure so long as you're cool with lowering strength bonuses to damage by a third, using 3.5's power attack and using a incredibly byzantine set of rules to dictate if you can or cannot add precision damage.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
None of these things are reasons a caster is good. Save DCs and spells per day are tangential to the fact that the spells themselves screw everything sideways.
Limiting the number of spells any more just leads to frustration and boredom from the player of the caster, this is an undesirable outcome.
Limiting the spells so that they're still useful and powerful, but not in the place they are now (obsoleting whole types of games and certain class features, and many skills).
The things like Invisibility negating the use of Stealth, and Spider Climb making Climb investment useless need to go.
Most Divinations need to be tweaked, especially the "less powerful" ones in many cases. Detect Alignment at will is surprisingly adept at overturning simple mystery plots.
"Oh by the way the mistress of the inn pings as strongly evil on my radar, so she's definitely up to no good and is probably a demon or something."
Things like that, which limit power but not fun.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure so long as you're cool with lowering strength bonuses to damage by a third, using 3.5's power attack and using a incredibly byzantine set of rules to dictate if you can or cannot add precision damage.
Well not really. Who is saying martials are overpowered? Not many.
Your reaction is odd. Imbalance tends to mean one side is in need of a nerf, or a boost, not both.
High DC's mean you're more likely to succeed, success means power and win.
So you're saying you don't want to succeed less often... what player would? You want the magicto be taken away from areas where it iisn't needed.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The answer is "no, not really".
Those who feel casters are imbalanced aren't concerned with spells per se. Action-for-action, melee who are engaged with an opponent are more likely to damage out and destroy that opponent.
The issue they see is the ability for casters (particularly in mid-to-high levels) to have a versitile arsenol of weapons to pick and choose. Too many enemies? Use a wall of force to block off half. Enemies are brute with no ranged weapons? Mass fly FTW. Enemy is a caster themselves? Summon a grappler into combat with them. Want to make allies into champions? Good old haste, online, and suddenly you've made melees / archers much more effectie.
Few casters use DCs on their spells (why would they?), so doing more to encourage casting DC spells would be handy (rather than discourage).
As to "winning" with casters, not really? My melee has been called "OP" far more often than my caster (and both certainly moreso than my buffer). But they do have a profound effect that can't be covered by numbers. I have also seen casters die far more often in my time; they have a habit of getting targeted, and are fairly squishy.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I continue to argue that with spells used within their limitations and the game run coherently I've never seen this spellcaster imbalance.
Interesting.
I think many people are asking the wrong question about this 'imbalance'.
Instead of asking "who is the most powerful?" Or similar phrases to which the answer is 'wizards' try asking "who has the most fun?"
It's often the players of fighters.
|
|
I think the other issue is it is simply far easier to imbalance a caster than a melee. Melee imbalance requires stacking prestige classes and kits and feats to bring out massive damage elements that can be applied even if they have to move, an immoveable AC, etc. Melees/archers are also far worse for people unwilling to dump stats, since they are very Multi-Attribute Dependent (MAD) relative to casters (who usually just need their casting stat and Con).
The spells basically tell you how to use them, and it's easy to identify / FAQ the "good ones".
So if you get veteran optimizers, melees can hang with casters just fine. In a newer group, if they hit mid levels or are "theorycrafting", they'll say "wow, casters can do this and that and that and just end combats".
It doesn't really happen in my experience, summoners aside. Summoners are the ONE class where the theory has matched the reality in what I've seen, and their ability to melee and cast as full casters makes them "win" combat. But I've said they need to be banned for some time now :).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
High DC's mean you're more likely to succeed, success means power and win.
So you're saying you don't want to succeed less often... what player would? You want the magicto be taken away from areas where it iisn't needed.
The success rate of spells, especially ones that actually allow saves, isn't the problem. Its that the spells them selves have to much narrative power. Got a over land trek complete with random encounter charts and such? Too bad, over land flight. Got a dungeon complete with traps to challenge the rogue and tough fights to challenge the fighter? Tough luck, detect magic finds the dangerous traps, spells can bypass the danger, and you can use magic to get past the monsters. BBEG doesn't see it coming because you bypassed his defense (unless he in tern is a caster). Surprise round, drop a battlefield control spell blocking off reinforcements. Round one the enemy goes down because the sorcerer did the barbarian full attack delivery trick. The rest of the party is reduced to being the war head of the magic ICBM.
The thing is there is nothing in the arsenal if full martials that can compete with the story changing powers of casters. A party full of martials by definition are all aboard the plot train types. It requires a much heavier hand to control casters.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The imbalance comes because people who believe this "Wizards rule fighters drool" nonsense assume that the fighter has zero magic items.
They claim that HP damage is completely irrelevant-- and if you look martial characters have a much greater opportunity for consistent, high HP damage than casters.
They will claim things like "Wall spells completely get around encounters". . . and they think Glitterdust is OP.
They assume that every caster level check is made, and every save failed.
They assume that the Wizards have time to make vast armies of S
simulacrons and that no one more powerful will be threatened by this and stop them.
They also seem to believe that you can cast spells in a social situation without anyone ever realizing you are doing so, that no one will take precautions against such, and that Charm Person makes the target your slave. . .
Don't listen to any of it. Just run your game, and when you see something that is making it less fun for either set of players, deal with it then.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here we go again
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here we go again
Not clever and disrespectful to everyone else engaging in the conversation for no obvious reason.
|
I know how to balance spellcasters, antimagic field. Its a 6th level spell, but you can completely shut down a couple of casters for some fights to make the martials feel good about themselves. Of course, its only useful if you are OK with everyone's damage output going down significantly (no magical strength bonuses or enhancement, or other), and a player or 2 feeling bored and useless in a fight or 2 being only able to aid another with a longspear.
OR you can let spellcasters be OP and let barbarians/fighters/paladins/rangers/rogues (in very very niche builds)/monks (see rogues)/other do stupid damage to.
I know how to balance spellcasters, antimagic field. Its a 6th level spell, but you can completely shut down a couple of casters for some fights to make the martials feel good about themselves. Of course, its only useful if you are OK with everyone's damage output going down significantly (no magical strength bonuses or enhancement, or other), and a player or 2 feeling bored and useless in a fight or 2 being only able to aid another with a longspear.
OR you can let spellcasters be OP and let barbarians/fighters/paladins/rangers/rogues (in very very niche builds)/monks (see rogues)/other do stupid damage to.
Those classes all do stupid damage already. . .
Here we go againNot clever and disrespectful to everyone else engaging in the conversation for no obvious reason.
Because this is a serious discussion on a fantasy roleplaying game and this topic along with the misunderstood monk, rogues suck, summoners are overpowered and alignment topics have not been dissected enough....Really!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know how to balance spellcasters, antimagic field. Its a 6th level spell, but you can completely shut down a couple of casters for some fights to make the martials feel good about themselves. Of course, its only useful if you are OK with everyone's damage output going down significantly (no magical strength bonuses or enhancement, or other), and a player or 2 feeling bored and useless in a fight or 2 being only able to aid another with a longspear.
OR you can let spellcasters be OP and let barbarians/fighters/paladins/rangers/rogues (in very very niche builds)/monks (see rogues)/other do stupid damage to.
See... here's the thing when you say Antimagic field as a counter to casters it really shows your lack of system mastery, since antimagic field is almost never a concern to a caster.
At the highest levels casters are straight up immune to it thanks to Aroden's Spellbane and they thank you for turning off all your buffs.
At earlier levels, you require an Ex means of flight (harder than it would seem outside of a certain race), since otherwise Antimagic field turns off any way of you actually getting at the flying caster.
Finally, an Antimagic field does nothing to stop a casters permanent minions and only has a chance of getting rid of their summoned ones.
But no please, turn off all your magic abilities, enemy casters will thank you.
|
|
Wow, I'd never seen aroden's spellbane. That looks rather OP, but it is a 9th level spell, so some OP is to be expected. Still, you've got levels 12-16 of magic not being broken. You just center an NPC or medium sized threat in the antimagic field who doesn't rely on magic and watch as the casters have lots of difficulty dealing with him, and the martials go to town on him (or try). Of course, this takes a bit of finesse, since if you don't do it carefully enough, you wind up with them just walking past a threat. So it does take difficulty. At level 17, everything is OP. At levels 12-16 it can be slightly managed.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
High DC's mean you're more likely to succeed, success means power and win.
So you're saying you don't want to succeed less often... what player would? You want the magicto be taken away from areas where it iisn't needed.
The success rate of spells, especially ones that actually allow saves, isn't the problem. Its that the spells them selves have to much narrative power. Got a over land trek complete with random encounter charts and such? Too bad, over land flight. Got a dungeon complete with traps to challenge the rogue and tough fights to challenge the fighter? Tough luck, detect magic finds the dangerous traps, spells can bypass the danger, and you can use magic to get past the monsters. BBEG doesn't see it coming because you bypassed his defense (unless he in tern is a caster). Surprise round, drop a battlefield control spell blocking off reinforcements. Round one the enemy goes down because the sorcerer did the barbarian full attack delivery trick. The rest of the party is reduced to being the war head of the magic ICBM.
The thing is there is nothing in the arsenal if full martials that can compete with the story changing powers of casters. A party full of martials by definition are all aboard the plot train types. It requires a much heavier hand to control casters.
First I'm going to address a couple points specifically in this post, then I'm going to address the specific spells you brought up.
Getting aboard the plot train has nothing to do with capabilities or limitations. It has to do with character motivation. Generally speaking if a character has no reason to go along with a specific adventure or plot beyond railroading either something went wrong during character creation or something went wrong with baiting the hook.
Let's remember that D&D (and as a result Pathfinder) has its roots in playing heroes who fight against evil powers and get rich doing so. Characters are by default assumed to be heroes. Generally speaking, that should be the default motivating factor for them. Characters might go on a given adventure because it is the right thing to do, because it is good for the common people, or because no one else can or will. Outside of that motivation there exist others that can apply pretty universally. A desire for wealth or items of power is one. Faith is another (especially for clerics or oracles). A desire for knowledge fits it - especially for high level wizards who might otherwise have trouble finding high level spells. Finally, most obviously, there are relationships with NPCs. This can take the form of lovers, mentors, members of organizations the PCs are a part of, allies, friends, or family and provides arguably the strongest motivating factor for PCs of any stripe - from hero to villain.
What I'm getting at is that there are all manner of ways to get PCs to go along with a given quest regardless of level or class, and suggesting that problems with motivating characters has to do with class is, frankly, not something I'm willing to put any stock in. At that point the problem lies with a player being obtuse or a GM struggling to create attachments to his world.
Overland Flight
Overland flight is a personal only spell that in no way removes navigation hazards or random encounters individually or collectively. It comes up only with regard to parties that consist only of primary spellcasters or a single character. It allows you to fly at the same speed as a horse walks, may still require you to make camp (for journeys longer than a day), and exposes you to attack from airborne predators while traveling (e.g. gargoyles, wyverns, dragons, ect), and ground based predators by night when resting (when you make camp - e.g. that random encounter chart you wanted to roll).
As a means of evading attacks and gaining what some describe as invincibility it is quite lacking. It does not function in most indoor environments due to low ceilings. It does not function in most urban environments where you will draw attention and make a fantastic target for enemies with ranged attacks or those with personal vendettas against you (since you stand out). It does not function against enemies with ranged attacks (e.g. breath weapons, conventional weapons, spells). It does not function in forests or jungles against enemies with climb speeds. Finally, most obviously, it does not function against flying enemies. It does function in areas with extremely high ceilings when you are prepared (e.g. you have flown up high). It does function in open plains against purely land based predators (mostly animals) when you know they are coming or are flying high in the air already. It's a pretty cool spell, but hardly game breaking.
Detect Magic
As a trap detection device this falls flat. Not only does it only function against magical traps and thus fail utterly at detecting more mundane threats (e.g. poison darts, falling rocks, pits, crossbow, poisoned doornobs, ect), it provides no information to you about what a given magical aura does. It is blocked by 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt. Clever (read higher level) enemies will build these sorts of materials into a given trap or use them to block broad spectrum detect magic scanning. Thankfully, rogues exist to notice such work and can usually detect when such countermeasures have been used.
Even when you do locate a trap, means of bypassing it are rarely as simple simply wishing it so as a spellcaster. Many are built into places you have to pass through. As a spellcaster using detect magic you may know that there is a trap but have no idea where it is or how to disarm it. Even if you do make use of spells to get around it (e.g. summon monster to detonate while hoping it doesn't rest, dimension door, ect), you are expending resources to do so that could be better used elsewhere (if you have a rogue). Basically, what I'm getting at isn't that a spellcaster can't find magical traps, but rather that there are ways to avoid that and that in the long run letting the rogue do his job is better for everyone. That said, that there are multiple ways around a problem - with varying degrees of efficiency - is not a bug of the system to me.
Full Attack Delivery Device (Aka Dimension Door)
This tactic can be fantastic. It allows a spellcaster to drop a martial character right in the lap of an unsuspecting enemy to deliver a murderous full attack. Unfortunately, it does have a weakness - if the enemy survives the full attack (or acts before it is delivered) the spellcaster has placed himself in a tremendously dangerous position where he can now be on the receiving end of the BBEG's full attack. It's also the sort of thing that only really works well against one opponent, since multiple opponents will likely immediately counter attack both the spellcaster and the martial character (especially if they have used this to cut themselves off from their allies and other party members).
Basically, I'm conceding that this tactic is pretty good - but also noting that it is pretty risky. I don't see where it is game breaking. it is the use of one person's resources to make another person look good. It allows both players to use their features and shine, and I fail to see why people list it as a 'broken' spellcaster trick and not also as a 'broken' martial trick, given that it works for both.
That said, there are a couple other ways around this if the party is overusing it. The obvious - multiple enemies - has already been mentioned, but things like illusions of the BBEG that get the spellcaster to waste their spell, the martial character's action, and place them both in a specifically bad position can be used sparingly and to great effect to effect. Like many counters to player abuse of the same tactic over and over again, typically it only takes one bad experience to make players think twice about use of that tactic.
Wow, I'd never seen aroden's spellbane. That looks rather OP, but it is a 9th level spell, so some OP is to be expected. Still, you've got levels 12-16 of magic not being broken. You just center an NPC or medium sized threat in the antimagic field who doesn't rely on magic and watch as the casters have lots of difficulty dealing with him, and the martials go to town on him (or try). Of course, this takes a bit of finesse, since if you don't do it carefully enough, you wind up with them just walking past a threat. So it does take difficulty. At level 17, everything is OP. At levels 12-16 it can be slightly managed.
I've always been a fan of the dragon antimagic field + grapple to be honest.
"Full Attack Delivery Device" is not Dimension Door. You're thinking of Telekinetic Charge. =)
As for traps, traps are pretty easy to detect anyway. ANYBODY can find traps.
Even if the caster isn't the best one for the job, by the by, the Rogue isn't either. Having a Rogue in the party is redundant if you have a <Insert Any Class Besides Fighter or Cavalier Here> in the party.
Overland Flight has few drawbacks, really. A simple Wind Wall (only a 3rd level spell) negates any archers, while a Contingency Dimension Door handles your melee attackers that manage to fly up there (a tactic used quite well by a caster in a game I am playing in currently).
You are correct a single casting of it won't negate land based obstacles for the whole party.
Multiple castings will, however, as will a single casting of Teleport.
Since it lasts all day, if a caster is willing to sacrifice 4 5th level spell slots (not an insignificant sum, but possibly worth it), the whole party can enjoy hours/level Flight, covering up to 64 miles that day (you can Hustle with no risk of nonlethal damage).
For short term problems, my party prefers Communal Air Walk from the Cleric/Oracle/Druid though.
"Full Attack Delivery Device" is not Dimension Door. You're thinking of Telekinetic Charge. =)
As for traps, traps are pretty easy to detect anyway. ANYBODY can find traps.
Even if the caster isn't the best one for the job, by the by, the Rogue isn't either. Having a Rogue in the party is redundant if you have a <Insert Any Class Besides Fighter or Cavalier Here> in the party.
Overland Flight has few drawbacks, really. A simple Wind Wall (only a 3rd level spell) negates any archers, while a Contingency Dimension Door handles your melee attackers that manage to fly up there (a tactic used quite well by a caster in a game I am playing in currently).
You are correct a single casting of it won't negate land based obstacles for the whole party.
Multiple castings will, however, as will a single casting of Teleport.
Since it lasts all day, if a caster is willing to sacrifice 4 5th level spell slots (not an insignificant sum, but possibly worth it), the whole party can enjoy hours/level Flight, covering up to 64 miles that day (you can Hustle with no risk of nonlethal damage).
For short term problems, my party prefers Communal Air Walk from the Cleric/Oracle/Druid though.
Lets start with the obvious, shall we?
Overland flight is a personal only spell. It only functions on the caster, so no, you cannot prepare it four times and cast it on the entire party. It still doesn't work anywhere without high ceilings. It negates many land based obstacles for an individual but, as noted, opens up new options for a a GM (flying beings) and only functions in an all arcane spellcaster party or in solo circumstances.
Teleport cannot take you to a place you have never been. Greater teleport can only do so with a detailed description. The suggestion that either ruins the ability to travel to a new or special location and have random encounters is false on its face, even before we enter into plot based limitations (e.g. energy fields, planar alignments, ect).
Telekinetic charge has a short range, is blocked by barriers, and provokes AoOs for movement. So much for using it to get the drop of the BBEG and avoid all of his minions?
You can only have a single contingency active at once. Using it to evade melee attacks is wise, but leaves you open to other forms of attack (e.g. magical, ranged). It also likely triggers frequently, which means the probable use of a 4th and 6th level spell slot each day towards that end (since it will likely be triggered each day). It only works against the first time each day the circumstances come up. I'd also be interested in how it is worded.
Wind wall is defeated by passing through it, waiting it out, moving around it, or shooting you before you cast it. It can also be countered by engaging the rest of your party who you have left in a lurch by spending your actions on purely selfish measures. It is a standard action spell that in effect requires you spend your entire turn to negate one form of attack for a short period from a specific direction.
The trap spotter talent remains a rogue exclusive that will continue to make rogues the best trap finders for the foreseeable future, since they do not actively have to slow down and search for traps to locate them. They also add half their level to finding and disabling, which at higher levels is not inconsiderable. Note, I think the rogue is a weak class for its own reasons that have nothing to do with the spellcaster / martial discussion, but give them their due in their area of specialization.
Communal air walk (and regular air walk) both have duration measured in 10 minutes / level (split among party in the communal version). It might let you avoid a single obstacle, but hardly an entire journey.
Before you get there let me cut you off with wind walk as requiring 5 rounds of complete vulnerability between shifting forms and complete impotency while in that form (no attacks, no spellcasting). It is an inherently dangerous spell to travel with, especially in potentially hostile areas. That said, it does allow for fast movement between safe locations. Personally, I think it is the most problematic travel spell, which is why I recommend the Tales of Wyre houserule that using it in the presence of strong winds can inflict injury or death.
Overland flight is a personal only spell. It only functions on the caster, so no, you cannot prepare it four times and cast it on the entire party.
My mistake, thought it was touch ranged for some reason.
It still doesn't work anywhere without high ceilings.
Works just fine as long as the ceiling is at least 10 feet high.
Teleport cannot take you to a place you have never been. Greater teleport can only do so with a detailed description. The suggestion that either ruins the ability to travel to a new or special location and have random encounters is false on its face, even before we enter into plot based limitations (e.g. energy fields, planar alignments, ect).
Scrying is a thing, you know. And there's a possibility that where you need to go is somewhere you've already been.
"Oh no, there's an army coming and we have to warn the king! But we're 100 miles away! We'll never make it in time!"
Wizard: "I got dis."
Telekinetic charge has a short range
Getting within 50 feet of an enemy is worse than ending up directly adjacent to them?
is blocked by barriers
Only if the barrier is taller than your range.
and provokes AoOs for movement.
And unless the entire area is packed with enemies you can avoid this. The caster has control over the exact path his ally takes within the range of the spell.
So much for using it to get the drop of the BBEG and avoid all of his minions?
Nope. Still a good spell.
You can only have a single contingency active at once. Using it to evade melee attacks is wise, but leaves you open to other forms of attack (e.g. magical, ranged). It also likely triggers frequently, which means the probable use of a 4th and 6th level spell slot each day towards that end (since it will likely be triggered each day). It only works against the first time each day the circumstances come up. I'd also be interested in how it is worded.
"Likely triggers frequently". Why's that again? And magical and ranged attacks have other counters. Our party's Sorcerer regularly has Contingency up for melee, and Spell Turning for spells. Ranged can be dealt with on a case by case basis.
Wind wall is defeated by passing through it
So the ranged combatant should get within melee range of the caster to fight him?
Good plan.
waiting it out
You do that. Meanwhile, the rest of the party is sitting around twiddling their thumbs too oh wait.
moving around it
"It is possible to create cylindrical or square wind walls to enclose specific points. "
or shooting you before you cast it.
Assuming you have the first action, and decide to target the caster first, and kill him, this works.
It can also be countered by engaging the rest of your party who you have left in a lurch by spending your actions on purely selfish measures. It is a standard action spell that in effect requires you spend your entire turn to negate one form of attack for a short period from a specific direction.
I hardly think you're "leaving your party in the lurch" by avoiding a threat that would kill you or interrupt your casting (and thus make you incapable of helping the party anyway).
The trap spotter talent remains a rogue exclusive that will continue to make rogues the best trap finders for the foreseeable future, since they do not actively have to slow down and search for traps to locate them. They also add half their level to finding and disabling, which at higher levels is not inconsiderable. Note, I think the rogue is a weak class for its own reasons that have nothing to do with the spellcaster / martial discussion, but give them their due in their area of specialization.
It's pretty telling that most Rogue archetypes trade out Trapfinding. Especially the ones that are better than normal.
Communal air walk (and regular air walk) both have duration measured in 10 minutes / level (split among party in the communal version). It might let you avoid a single obstacle, but hardly an entire journey.
I didn't say it would let them avoid an entire journey.
"For short term problems, my party prefers Communal Air Walk from the Cleric/Oracle/Druid though."
For your average "Going on foot here is really dangerous" scenarios, it's good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me be clear here - my point is not and has never been that spellcasters were bad or useless. My point is not that all spells are terrible. My point is that despite having played since 3.0 I've yet to see a single case of a spellcaster dominating and breaking games that did not involve bad tactics, poor world building, or lack of attention to the actual limits of the spell (for instance, that overland flight is personal only).
My purpose is not to suggest that people shouldn't play spellcasters. It is to debunk argument that spellcasting - especially high level spellcasting - is somehow game breaking and must be destroyed or changed. To tear apart the hyperbolic argument that divinations instantly unravel every plot, teleport alleviates all travel worries, and martial characters are pointless at high levels. I don't believe the game is broken when run within the limits of the rules (or even run without by a competent GM).
I want to help point out the many pitfalls of the 'spellcaster supremacy' argument to help other people have more enjoyable games because I think that D&D/PF magic at high levels adds a lot to the game in terms of storytelling. I don't want to see that storytelling destroyed like it was from 3.5-4E because a bunch of blowhards ran around screaming that the system was broken and that the only solution was to take away all the spellcasting toys.
Towards that end I've basically been taking apart specific spells and circumstances cited as game breaking - for instance teleport, overland flight, legend lore, and scrying. At some point I'll put it all together in a big old post that hopefully can serve as a point of reference.
Works just fine as long as the ceiling is at least 10 feet high.
No, you actually means works fine as long as the ceiling is 15ft. high or greater and the enemies you are fighting are medium sized, since floating 5ft. above the ground still leaves you in melee range of medium sized creatures. It works fine if the ceiling is at least 25ft. high if the enemies are larger or bigger. So basically, what I think you actually meant to say was that it very rarely works indoors. If it does and is breaking your game, maybe you should just start describing lower ceilings?
Scrying is a thing, you know. And there's a possibility that where you need to go is somewhere you've already been.
As I’ve pointed out elsewhere many times, scrying only works if you have a target. It allows a save. It takes a long time. It requires knowledge of or a connection to the being you are scrying, and even then allows significant save bonuses. It can only be attempted 1/day per target. You cannot simply scry a random location.
It is entirely possible you've been somewhere before, but somewhat rare if you are going on a new adventure in which the GM wants you to encounter a large number of random encounters.
Also worth nothing that I’ve seen several developers pretty much say outright that scry + teleport doesn’t work even if you do find someone to scry, and that the teleport /scrying clause has to do with specific circumstances. Might have been James Jacobs. That isn’t exactly a hard rule or one that I would apply, but if it is damaging your game you might try it.
"Oh no, there's an army coming and we have to warn the king! But we're 100 miles away! We'll never make it in time!"
Wizard: "I got dis."
A highly specific circumstance in which a high level spell is useful? Color me surprised? I’ve never meant to imply that spellcasting is bad or useless, rather that it is not the all powerful force many commentators here make it out to be. Spells in PF tend to have highly specific limitations. I actually think that scenario is a great example of high level characters using their powers as part of an adventure. They sneak across the border by mundane means and discover the enemy army, then have to teleport back to warn the king so he can raise his army? Sounds like a cool adventure to me.
Getting within 50 feet of an enemy is worse than ending up directly adjacent to them?
Getting within 50ft. of an enemy with no barriers between you or enemies between you (for example, down a corridor filled with enemies) is significantly more difficult than simple line of sight and more likely to not catch him by surprise than the alternative, no?
Only if the barrier is taller than your range.
Right, for instance a wall of force, a wall of stone, wall of fire, blade barrier, a castle wall, ect.
And unless the entire area is packed with enemies you can avoid this. The caster has control over the exact path his ally takes within the range of the spell.
Which is great unless you are in a confined space, like say a dungeon or castle or a building. Or unless the bad guy is simply surrounded in close by allies and bodyguards rather than having to cover every single space. Maybe I'm just too accustomed to playing with competent GMs (shout out to Kain Darkwind here).
Nope. Still a good spell.
I never said it was a bad spell.
"Likely triggers frequently". Why's that again? And magical and ranged attacks have other counters. Our party's Sorcerer regularly has Contingency up for melee, and Spell Turning for spells. Ranged can be dealt with on a case by case basis.
If it triggers any time he gets hit in melee or grappled one would assume it happens with some frequency. Or at least I would. Might be a symptom of my games though were there are frequently plenty of enemies on the board.
Spell turning is a 10 minutes / level spell. Your sorcerer has it up all the time? Man, he must not have very many slots left for other things. Or is he casting that one at the start of every fight as well?
So the ranged combatant should get within melee range of the caster to fight him?
Good plan.
Uh, if I’ve got anything better than poor BAB I’m absolutely happy to close within melee range with a caster pretty much every day of the week. Grapple is now an absolute shut down for casters if you can land it and the vast majority of them seem to tank their AC under the mistaken belief that their overland flight spell will protect them - making them easy prey even for dedicated ranged attackers.
"It is possible to create cylindrical or square wind walls to enclose specific points. "
You can absolutely choose to make it a cylinder. If you do so you are likely anchoring yourself to a specific location though, in which case I'd probably have the ranged attackers withdraw to hit you later - they aren't mindless automatons who can't tell that their arrows aren't reaching you. You can also make it a wall - in which case people can move around it, because again they aren't mindless automatons who are going to stand there screaming 'kill me!' and wallowing in their helplessness as a result of your round / level spell.
Incidentally, withdrawing is the same tactic I see experienced GMs use in the face of things like walls, clouds, and so forth - especially debuffing ones. There is nothing more frustrating as a player than to put up a cloud to weaken enemies and then find that they use it to withdraw - leaving you to decide if you want to charge through your own cloud or let them get away and harass you later.
Assuming you have the first action, and decide to target the caster first, and kill him, this works.
Or that you target the obvious spellcaster (because he’s flying around) and ready an action to shoot him when he tries to cast a spell.
I hardly think you're "leaving your party in the lurch" by avoiding a threat that would kill you or interrupt your casting (and thus make you incapable of helping the party anyway).
If you are regularly personal defensive spells at the start of each combat then you are regularly not helping the rest of your party. A dedicated spellcaster can absolutely be nothing but a waste of space on a party by dedicating themselves to casting defensive spells for themselves to counter their short comings – but such a caster is probably more of a problem to the rest of the party than to the GM.
It's pretty telling that most Rogue archetypes trade out Trapfinding. Especially the ones that are better than normal.
Telling that they trade out a low level ability so they can immediately start gaining new features? In what way?
I didn't say it would let them avoid an entire journey.
And yet that was the context within which my commentary was set (as well you know).
I love these discussions. The Magic User is OP! The Rogue SUCKS! The Fighter is USELESS! The Monk is... well he's a Monk... So on and so forth.
The encounters listed are so easy to counter with any given class that you could literally give me a level 20 one where you think you have all the advantages and I'll give you a counter to it any day of the week.
But the discussion is fun. ^-^
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lately I've been very happy with the balance of Pathfinder.
Alchemist, Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Magus, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard, Sorcerer. All work well together.
Psionics adds Psions, Psychic Warriors, Soul Knives, Vitalists, and Wilders are all solid. It's my understanding that most of the other psionic classes by DSP are also pretty solid but I don't have a lot of experience with them.
Our games seem to be pretty different. Even with a competent GM, casters usually don't get hit that often when I play. They either have more immediate targets, or when they do move in there's something up to block them.
I've rarely run into a scenario where "Smash the squishy" was the main tactic when the squishy is 60 feet behind the Raging madman crushing the opposition.
On scrying and teleporting, that's definitely a houserule by JJ. Not a bad one, but I don't like to bring in houserules when discussing the power of a spell itself.
"“Viewed once” is a place that you have seen once, possibly using magic such as scrying."
Note when I say Scrying, I use that as a catchall for long distance viewing Divinations. It's the most iconic, and generally are referred to in fiction either as divinations, or "scrying magics".
You can absolutely choose to make it a cylinder. If you do so you are likely anchoring yourself to a specific location though, in which case I'd probably have the ranged attackers withdraw to hit you later - they aren't mindless automatons who can't tell that their arrows aren't reaching you. You can also make it a wall - in which case people can move around it, because again they aren't mindless automatons who are going to stand there screaming 'kill me!' and wallowing in their helplessness as a result of your round / level spell.
Incidentally, withdrawing is the same tactic I see experienced GMs use in the face of things like walls, clouds, and so forth - especially debuffing ones. There is nothing more frustrating as a player than to put up a cloud to weaken enemies and then find that they use it to withdraw - leaving you to decide if you want to charge through your own cloud or let them get away and harass you later.
But again, what is the rest of the party doing? And this isn't a solid option in many scenarios.
If they're guarding something, why would they run away at the first sign of opposition?
If they're there to attack the PCs/assassinate them, why would they retreat if they can't harm ONE member of the group?
You see where I'm going?
Also charging through the cloud isn't your only option. I think ALL of the cloud spells are Dismissable.
Spell turning is a 10 minutes / level spell. Your sorcerer has it up all the time? Man, he must not have very many slots left for other things. Or is he casting that one at the start of every fight as well?
My experience is based on a 14th level Sorcerer. 140 minutes is a good long time, enough for us to get through 3 or 4 encounters at least in a typical dungeon crawl (which book 5 of RotRL is).
Telling that they trade out a low level ability so they can immediately start gaining new features? In what way?
Telling that even the devs don't see it as an integral part of the class any more, a sentiment that most experienced players hold as well.
I have never been in a situation where I was like "Gee, I sure do wish we had a Rogue in the party". There's always another class that does what they do but better, and Trapfinding doesn't really change that scenario.
Hell, in this same RotRL game my BARBARIAN is the trap guy. Trap Wrecker and Spell Sunder on top of a solid Perception check? Good stuff.
If you are regularly personal defensive spells at the start of each combat then you are regularly not helping the rest of your party. A dedicated spellcaster can absolutely be nothing but a waste of space on a party by dedicating themselves to casting defensive spells for themselves to counter their short comings – but such a caster is probably more of a problem to the rest of the party than to the GM.
Except you don't "regularly do it the first round of combat". Most of these spells last 10 minutes per level at least, barring the one in question (Wind Wall).
Not every combat includes archers. For the ones that do, Wind Wall is an option. Mirror Image, Blur, even the lackluster Deflect Arrows are all other options as well (You ask why the Contingency doesn't go off very often? Mirror Image is usually a part of that. Yeesh, that spell.)
Or that you target the obvious spellcaster (because he’s flying around) and ready an action to shoot him when he tries to cast a spell.
Readying an action still requires your Initiative to come up before the caster's. Unless you're proposing that every archer sits around all day going "I ready an action to shoot any spellcaster who might show up when he tries to cast a spell (regardless of whether or not I'm expecting to be attacked today at all, much less by a caster)"?
On Telekinetic Charge, no it's not a good way to deal with castles. But you wanted a "Full Attack Delivery Service", which is what it is. It's to get your big and beefy next to the bad guy when you're already in combat, but don't wanna wade through his minions before you start pounding on him.
I sincerely doubt, again, that the usual scenario is for the BBEG to keep his minions within 5 feet of him at all times.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love these discussions. The Magic User is OP! The Rogue SUCKS! The Fighter is USELESS! The Monk is... well he's a Monk... So on and so forth.
The encounters listed are so easy to counter with any given class that you could literally give me a level 20 one where you think you have all the advantages and I'll give you a counter to it any day of the week.
But the discussion is fun. ^-^
No person on the Magic Users are OP side is claiming that Casters have no counter.... they do. The problem is the only counter to a level 20 caster is *another* level 20 caster that thought of more things then you did. (Which means the winner is really the person who has more experience with casters and knows what tactics they need defenses against and what offensive abilities can get around most defenses and then throwing these effects against each other until one casters defenses weren't enough at which point they lose).
These tend to break into "I knew you knew that I knew that you knew that I knew..."
I love these discussions. The Magic User is OP! The Rogue SUCKS! The Fighter is USELESS! The Monk is... well he's a Monk... So on and so forth.
The encounters listed are so easy to counter with any given class that you could literally give me a level 20 one where you think you have all the advantages and I'll give you a counter to it any day of the week.
But the discussion is fun. ^-^
No person on the Magic Users are OP side is claiming that Casters have no counter.... they do. The problem is the only counter to a level 20 caster is *another* level 20 caster that thought of more things then you did. (Which means the winner is really the person who has more experience with casters and knows what tactics they need defenses against and what offensive abilities can get around most defenses and then throwing these effects against each other until one casters defenses weren't enough at which point they lose).
These tend to break into "I knew you knew that I knew that you knew that I knew..."
Now if you think you can present a CR 24 (made using official Paizo material) or less challenge that does not have access to a caster list (so... an Ancient Wyrm Dragon is another caster as above) that you think can take a level 20 Caster... Buzz... I would love to see you try.
Edit: While the edit and reply button are near each other... they are not the same...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I highly doubt any caster person is arguing against certain spells being nerfed (Looking at you Simulacrum.)
But an overall nerf? No we don't want that, what we want is for level 20 Fighter to act like a Level 20 Fighter and not a Level 6 Fighter with more + hit. What I mean by that is that a Level 20 Fighter is not and should not be constrained by what is "realistically" possible. They should make craters in the earth when they hit, smash walls with mighty blows, move so quick they basically just short range teleported, shout their defiance at the world and negate status effects/spells, overcome saves with their zen like focus, block every arrow thrown at them (and then shoot them back), inspire their allies to fight despite the very mortal wounds they are suffering, oh ya... and be able to you know move and full attack without needing to be a Barbarian or Druid...
Our games seem to be pretty different. Even with a competent GM, casters usually don't get hit that often when I play. They either have more immediate targets, or when they do move in there's something up to block them.
I've rarely run into a scenario where "Smash the squishy" was the main tactic when the squishy is 60 feet behind the Raging madman crushing the opposition.
Right, because hopefully you don't simply intend to kill your players. . . the enemies tend to attack the fighters first because the fighters are the ones most likely to kill them due to HP damage and the most pressing threat. And the fighters most likely get the most killing blows on the bad guys outside of an occasional SoD that works or chaff that is put in to make the wizards use their Fireballs.
But again, what is the rest of the party doing? And this isn't a solid option in many scenarios.If they're guarding something, why would they run away at the first sign of opposition?
If they're there to attack the PCs/assassinate them,...
SO what are the non-spellcasters doing while the spellcaster is out of range behind his immobile wind wall to protect himself?
That's your argument for why Spellcasters are clearly OP because they can take themselves out of the combat and the Barbarian can still chase the archers down and kill them when they try to run away?
Our games seem to be pretty different. Even with a competent GM, casters usually don't get hit that often when I play. They either have more immediate targets, or when they do move in there's something up to block them.
I've rarely run into a scenario where "Smash the squishy" was the main tactic when the squishy is 60 feet behind the Raging madman crushing the opposition.
Right, because hopefully you don't simply intend to kill your players. . . the enemies tend to attack the fighters first because the fighters are the ones most likely to kill them due to HP damage and the most pressing threat. And the fighters most likely get the most killing blows on the bad guys outside of an occasional SoD that works or chaff that is put in to make the wizards use their Fireballs.
But again, what is the rest of the party doing? And this isn't a solid option in many scenarios.If they're guarding something, why would they run away at the first sign of opposition?
If they're there to attack the PCs/assassinate them,...
SO what are the non-spellcasters doing while the spellcaster is out of range behind his immobile wind wall to protect himself?
That's your argument for why Spellcasters are clearly OP because they can take themselves out of the combat and the Barbarian can still chase the archers down and kill them when they try to run away?
I've read this 3 times now and it still makes 0 sense so my response is mostly guess at what you meant.
1. Do I have this correctly; You would rather kill the guy who if he moves only gets one attack that *might* hit you, instead of the guy who can turn two of your teammates against you with no save in one round (Limited Wish duplicating Geass cast by a neutral caster and Quickened via Rod or Staff of the Master version of the same thing.) That seems like a terrible strategy to me.
2. Spellcasters are powerful because to even try and damage one you have to overcome layered defenses that only get stronger and stronger as they go up in level.
A Flying, Mirror Image'd, Invisible, Fickle Winds defense layer is pretty basic (and far from exhaustive), but even that requires an attacked to 1. Be able to hit at range, or fly themselves, 2. Have true seeing, 3. Have See Invisibility (though true seeing works for both), 4. Must now use either melee attacks or spells. Each new spell adds a new problem you have solve before you even consider fighting a caster and guess what the solutions are limited to? If you guessed "more spells" you win a pony.*
Of course you *could* try dispeling those, but thats a painful one at time thanks to the dispel magi nerf. Greater Dispel/Disjunction are thing here but at the level you are tossing Disjunction at a caster they are immune to it.
*As summoned by Mount, Pony is good for entire duration of the spell. Offer not valid were void by local law.
I highly doubt any caster person is arguing against certain spells being nerfed (Looking at you Simulacrum.)
But an overall nerf? No we don't want that, what we want is for level 20 Fighter to act like a Level 20 Fighter and not a Level 6 Fighter with more + hit. What I mean by that is that a Level 20 Fighter is not and should not be constrained by what is "realistically" possible. They should make craters in the earth when they hit, smash walls with mighty blows, move so quick they basically just short range teleported, shout their defiance at the world and negate status effects/spells, overcome saves with their zen like focus, block every arrow thrown at them (and then shoot them back), inspire their allies to fight despite the very mortal wounds they are suffering, oh ya... and be able to you know move and full attack without needing to be a Barbarian or Druid...
Might I suggest Big Eyes Small Mouth, Exalted or some other Anime inspired RPG?
I know for a fact there is a decent amount of fighter players who don't want any of what you described-- they want to never miss, to take a lot of attacks in a round, and to deal a lot of damage with those attacks. . . all of which they do.
I highly doubt any caster person is arguing against certain spells being nerfed (Looking at you Simulacrum.)
But an overall nerf? No we don't want that, what we want is for level 20 Fighter to act like a Level 20 Fighter and not a Level 6 Fighter with more + hit. What I mean by that is that a Level 20 Fighter is not and should not be constrained by what is "realistically" possible. They should make craters in the earth when they hit, smash walls with mighty blows, move so quick they basically just short range teleported, shout their defiance at the world and negate status effects/spells, overcome saves with their zen like focus, block every arrow thrown at them (and then shoot them back), inspire their allies to fight despite the very mortal wounds they are suffering, oh ya... and be able to you know move and full attack without needing to be a Barbarian or Druid...
Might I suggest Big Eyes Small Mouth, Exalted or some other Anime inspired RPG?
I know for a fact there is a decent amount of fighter players who don't want any of what you described-- they want to never miss, to take a lot of attacks in a round, and to deal a lot of damage with those attacks. . . all of which they do.
Those people want to play E6 and should do so. Not pretend the difference between a level 1 Fighter and a Level 20 Fighter is more +hit and three more attacks if they don't move (or the same number of attacks if they do).
Because their caster counterparts go from neat tricks to telling reality to make them a sandwich and its only right that Fighters should get a similar scaling with level.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Until you experience a problem in your game don't worry about it, and then take the steps need for your group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is worth prefacing all of this by saying that Anzyr and I have gone round and around on these issues at least three our four times, so if it seems like we are touching on old bases, don’t assume you’ve missed something. It’s also worth noting that he and I approach the game from fundamentally different perspectives.
Typically his caster focused approach involves access to obscure spells, stacking of multiple spells from different sources, and robot-like regimens of spells cast each day in a specific order to achieve specific metagame effects. For example, stackings of various spells to achieve the most powerful possible use of spells like blood money as detailed here. He’s from the Character Optimization school that attempts to find the most powerful and questionable combinations and cracks in the rules. I am not. He has shown in the past that he adopts the most powerful possible interpretations of various spells and effects – regardless of direct developer feedback that outright contradict his interpretation (e.g. simulacrum).
My approach tends to focus on characters as they exist in a given world – e.g. as mortal beings with mortal goals, desires, and limitation. I play characters in the long haul with a highly experienced and extremely dedicated GM, and rather than attempt to create headaches for him I try to work with him to tell the stories we both want to tell. My advice typically assumes that if there are two ways to interpret things you will take the more reasonable of them, and typically is in line with developer comments.
Framed another way, he's the guy that is trying to build a car that goes as fast as it can regardless how much it costs and whether or not it is street legal, while I'm the guy trying to build a car that will get you where you are going at a reasonable speed and without breaking any laws.
With that said, any kind of understanding between Anzyr and I – or even a middle ground of any kind – is unlikely. I’m replying here simply to provide the alternative perspective to his own.
Our games seem to be pretty different. Even with a competent GM, casters usually don't get hit that often when I play. They either have more immediate targets, or when they do move in there's something up to block them.
I've rarely run into a scenario where "Smash the squishy" was the main tactic when the squishy is 60 feet behind the Raging madman crushing the opposition.
No doubt we play different games – and there isn’t anything wrong with that. My games tend to include a higher frequency of very dangerous and potentially lethal encounters. My gm enjoys throwing fantastic odds at the party and forcing them to find a way to overcome them. In the last major story arc the (14th-15th level) party found themselves at various times…
-Locked in antimagic rooms with no gear at the end of an adventuring day that had already included four or five encounters. The walls were walls of force. They were forced to escape, then battle through an forty or fifty room keep against spellcasters, golems, clockwork enemies, mi-go, Hounds of Tindalos, and more within the space of a single night. If I remember correctly before the end of that day the party had fought through something like twenty or twenty-five encounters. The final encounter was a mass combat against an 11th level wizard with ~500,000gp in wealth, a 13th level wizard powered up at the seat of her power, a number of iron golems, something like twenty 5th level wizards, and half a dozen maguses of between 10th and 15th level.
-Fighting through a trap door to a ~40ft by 40ft. floor area with a mix of monstrous humanoids defending it. That floor was surrounded by a spiral staircase all the way to the top three levels high (e.g. looped three times) packed with more monstrous humanoids. In total there were probably 70-80 enemies on the board. Every one benefited from blur (weak brutes in the 7-10 HD range – approximately 40 in number), many had mirror image and blur (weak brutes armed with wands – approximately 15), and several had greater invisibility, blur, and mirror image (high level rogues – approximately 15). At the top of the staircase was a powerful wizard who was also raining down spells and had similar defensive buffs. In the middle of the battle enemies slain before (including a scaled down gibbering orb and four advanced / giant stone golems) reanimated and attacked the party. This battle was not the climax of the adventure and was in the middle of a day that had already included ~9-10 combat encounters.
-Battling against a high level mythic cleric, a mythic rogue wielding a dagger that inflicted vile bleeding wounds, a mythic defender, a couple monsters with huge reach, and a pair of haunting built cursed runes that sprayed a mix of enervation, waves of fatigue, finger of death, and feebleminded at the party each round. Oh, and they were all invulnerable until specific changes were made to the environment. And halfway through the fight the GM threw in a demilich that got what was functionally a surprise round on the party (including a wail of the banshee that hit almost the entire party).
On scrying and teleporting, that's definitely a houserule by JJ. Not a bad one, but I don't like to bring in houserules when discussing the power of a spell itself.
Well, yes and no. His argument was effectively that the viewed once aspect of scrying only comes up if you learn the location – e.g. the people you scry talk about where they are. That isn’t strictly spelled out within the rules either way, so ultimately it’s a GM call. I don’t run it as such, but I’m reluctant to describe something that is a judgment call as a house rule.
That said, again, I don’t think it is a needed position.
Note when I say Scrying, I use that as a catchall for long distance viewing Divinations. It's the most iconic, and generally are referred to in fiction either as divinations, or "scrying magics".
Right, so what divination spell lets you look in on a far off place you’ve never seen before?
But again, what is the rest of the party doing? And this isn't a solid option in many scenarios.
If they're guarding something, why would they run away at the first sign of opposition?
If they're there to attack the PCs/assassinate them, why would they retreat if they can't harm ONE member of the group?
You see where I'm going?
Also charging through the cloud isn't your only option. I think ALL of the cloud spells are Dismissable.
I suppose it would vary on the circumstances. Generally speaking though if defending a complex (e.g. a serious of rooms like a dungeon) against an enemy with limited resources (aka spells) it is not a bad idea to withdraw when they’ve expended a number of them to make circumstances less advantageous to you.
Similarly, if you are trying to murder someone then withdrawing once they are aware / prepared for you and striking again later is likely a better option than fighting a battle that is turning against you – especially if you aren’t on a time limit and prefer to strike from surprise. As a player it is tremendously frustrating to eat random death attacks when out on the street from unknown assailants who melt away once their initial attempt failed – but also a realistic and immersive use of tactics (if you’re curious we solved this problem with a whirlwind spell against one assassin that tore away his cover, then a raid on the stronghold of his fellows later).
My experience is based on a 14th level Sorcerer. 140 minutes is a good long time, enough for us to get through 3 or 4 encounters at least in a typical dungeon crawl (which book 5 of RotRL is).
Sure. I actually make use of a couple of lower level 10 minute / level spells as daily buffs with a rod of metamagic lesser extend. I’m just surprised at the use of such a high level spell. What I’m getting from you though is that it’s more of a pre-combat buff though.
I would point out that spell turning is a double-edged sword though in many instances, since it functions against all spells that target you, including healing spells and buffs, and it is only likely to turn one high level offensive spell per casting.
Telling that even the devs don't see it as an integral part of the class any more, a sentiment that most experienced players hold as well.
I have never been in a situation where I was like "Gee, I sure do wish we had a Rogue in the party". There's always another class that does what they do but better, and Trapfinding doesn't really change that scenario.
Hell, in this same RotRL game my BARBARIAN is the trap guy. Trap Wrecker and Spell Sunder on top of a solid Perception check? Good stuff.
Without a doubt the change to trapfinding and traps as a whole between 3.5 to PF was a big nail in the rogue coffin in terms of limiting their necessity in a given game. I’ll maintain that the ability to notice traps simply by passing by, rather than actively searching, has a huge place in the game still though, and that remains a rogue only trick. I’ve said on numerous occasions (including on this thread) that the rogue could use some serious love though, so you won’t see that much argument on this point from me.
The larger point I was making was that detect magic does not undo all traps, which was the initial suggestion.
Except you don't "regularly do it the first round of combat". Most of these spells last 10 minutes per level at least, barring the one in question (Wind Wall).
Not every combat includes archers. For the ones that do, Wind Wall is an option. Mirror Image, Blur, even the lackluster Deflect Arrows are all other options as well (You ask why the Contingency doesn't go off very often? Mirror Image is usually a part of that. Yeesh, that spell.)
Mirror image is a real son of a mother against single enemies. It does get undermined somewhat though against mooks – especially since it attacks your AC -5. It definitely seems like this is one of the big differences between our games – in that mine tend to feature larger casts of enemies rather than a few big ones.
It’s worth noting though that mirror image and blur are both minute per level spells, not ten minute per level spells – as are most defensive buffs against martial attacks. With that in mind I find it unlikely that you enter every combat with plenty of them active (though I could be wrong – combat in my game tends to often occur when we least expect it).
Readying an action still requires your Initiative to come up before the caster's. Unless you're proposing that every archer sits around all day going "I ready an action to shoot any spellcaster who might show up when he tries to cast a spell (regardless of whether or not I'm expecting to be attacked today at all, much less by a caster)"?
Sure, but an archer out to kill a group or intent on killing an individual in which there is a clear spellcaster present can logically take steps against that spellcasting. Disrupting spellcasting with a readied action (especially a ranged attack) can be an absolute killer for a caster.
On Telekinetic Charge, no it's not a good way to deal with castles. But you wanted a "Full Attack Delivery Service", which is what it is. It's to get your big and beefy next to the bad guy when you're already in combat, but don't wanna wade through his minions before you start pounding on him.
Right, you can also use dimension door, which is probably more common since it’s a core spell rather than a splatbook one. They’re both good spells though and can be used towards largely the same purpose – with varying drawbacks for each.
I sincerely doubt, again, that the usual scenario is for the BBEG to keep his minions within 5 feet of him at all times.
Depends on the bad guy – and note depending on the minions they may not have to be anywhere close to 5ft. Reminds me of a major combat we had a couple years ago against a Champion of Demogorgon. Nasty fight where the boss buffed fully while we fought his minions up top, then met us in a room with two dedicated bodyguards. They were all large sized and armed with spears – which gave them fantastic reach. Combined with the x3 crit it was very nearly a TPK because the fighters kept getting mauled trying to get in close and for a number of reasons the casters couldn’t reliably teleport in the area. Pretty sure the only reason we survived at all was because a couple of NPCs died to open a hole for the party fighters. Even then, as soon as we started to get control they withdrew to another area and forced us to start all over again. That (13th level) combat resulted in, I believe, the party walking out in single digits across the board as towards the end the casters started provoking to open up lanes for the martials who were near death.
Note here, when I list alternatives and counters though to specific tactics I don’t mean to suggest things are always set up in that way – or should always be set up that way. I think good player tactics and smart spell use should be rewarded more often than not. I’m offering suggestions for countering overuse / game breaking aspects of them.
No person on the Magic Users are OP side is claiming that Casters have no counter.... they do. The problem is the only counter to a level 20 caster is *another* level 20 caster that thought of more things then you did. (Which means the winner is really the person who has more experience with casters and knows what tactics they need defenses against and what offensive abilities can get around most defenses and then throwing these effects against each other until one casters defenses weren't enough at which point they lose).
These tend to break into "I knew you knew that I knew that you knew that I knew..."
Obviously my experiences don’t exactly go this way. More often than not the counter to a high level NPC of any class is a collaborative effort by a group of PCs to bring them down. I’m pretty sure the kinds of games Anzyr is talking about here are ones in which PCs have armies of simulacrum to call upon through the use of ‘blood money wishes’ and ‘free wish planar bindings’.
Conventionally, there is almost always a couple different ways around the existing caster defenses (especially if they can’t leave an area they are protecting).
Now if you think you can present a CR 24 (made using official Paizo material) or less challenge that does not have access to a caster list (so... an Ancient Wyrm Dragon is another caster as above) that you think can take a level 20 Caster... Buzz... I would love to see you try.
As amusing as I find this challenge I suspect our differing views on how various things should be run and arbitrated probably means that it would be meaningless to even try and arrange this. Beyond that, given unlimited resources and the ability to expend unlimited resources I absolutely believe that a 20th level highly optimized spellcaster can overcome a single opponent of similar strength that they are prepared for / expecting.
I suspect you could also probably build a martial character that could do the same in the same circumstances, through a combination of use magic device, custom magic items, and (especially) the use of a bow.
I highly doubt any caster person is arguing against certain spells being nerfed (Looking at you Simulacrum.)
As we’ve discussed on several occasions, I see absolutely zero problem with simulacrum as written. The only problem is that it requires a GM take the time to build what he considers an appropriate copy of a given creature, which can be a bit of a headache.
Then again, I don’t subscribe to the fringe school that has been debunked by pretty much every developer for PF that a simulacrum retains all of its unique abilities and spell-like abilities of the original creature (and that the player gets to build it).
But an overall nerf? No we don't want that, what we want is for level 20 Fighter to act like a Level 20 Fighter and not a Level 6 Fighter with more + hit. What I mean by that is that a Level 20 Fighter is not and should not be constrained by what is "realistically" possible. They should make craters in the earth when they hit, smash walls with mighty blows, move so quick they basically just short range teleported, shout their defiance at the world and negate status effects/spells, overcome saves with their zen like focus, block every arrow thrown at them (and then shoot them back), inspire their allies to fight despite the very mortal wounds they are suffering, oh ya... and be able to you know move and full attack without needing to be a Barbarian or Druid.
My experience has tended to be that the ability to murder powerful angels, demons, and monsters within 6 seconds of closing with them is a pretty cool ability. Likewise the ability to withstand rains of attacks from conventional soldiers without a scratch and overcome legions of individuals singlehandedly is pretty impressive.
Beyond that, might I point you to the use of mythic, or perhaps (as others suggested) an alternative system to pathfinder if you want Dragonball Z and Bleach like fights? I’ve heard extremely good things about Exalted.
Do I have this correctly; You would rather kill the guy who if he moves only gets one attack that *might* hit you, instead of the guy who can turn two of your teammates against you with no save in one round (Limited Wish duplicating Geass cast by a neutral caster and Quickened via Rod or Staff of the Master version of the same thing.) That seems like a terrible strategy to me.
Taking this ridiculous example at face value (no wonder people call for wish / limited wish to use the casting time of duplicated spell), this particular tactic probably wouldn’t actually work at a given table, because what constitutes the limitations of a geas, particularly that “geas cannot compel a creature to kill itself or perform acts that would result in certain death”, will vary a bit by GM. I’d probably rule that turning on my allies in the middle of a battle probably constitutes an act that will result in certain death.
Geas also requires you give specific orders – it does not allow you to exercise control as per dominate person. It requires you communicate those orders clearly. It requires they be understood. As soon as your order is completed the geas ends.
Geas can be undone by a variety of spells (including 3rd level spells).
Geas is mind-affecting. Geas is language dependent. Geas is a compulsion. All of these sharply limit the number of foes it functions against.
Spellcasters are powerful because to even try and damage one you have to overcome layered defenses that only get stronger and stronger as they go up in level.
No, not really. This is only the case in any sense at extremely high levels when a given spellcaster has spell slots to burn and enough caster level to make them stick. For pretty much all of a spellcaster’s career he relies on relatively short duration spells he must cast shortly before or during combat. He is extremely vulnerable to surprise. When low on spells he becomes vulnerable. His defenses can be taken down by, many allow saves, many rely on luck, and many have built in counters.
Even at high level the defenses of a spellcaster make him far from omni-potent or particularly tough even, unless he has taken time immediately before to layer on defenses for a forthcoming fight (and even then these defenses can be undone).
A Flying, Mirror Image'd, Invisible, Fickle Winds defense layer is pretty basic (and far from exhaustive), but even that requires an attacked to 1. Be able to hit at range, or fly themselves, 2. Have true seeing, 3. Have See Invisibility (though true seeing works for both), 4. Must now use either melee attacks or spells. Each new spell adds a new problem you have solve before you even consider fighting a caster and guess what the solutions are limited to? If you guessed "more spells" you win a pony.*
Flying only works outdoors or in areas with high ceilings against enemies without ranged attacks. Mirror image, invisibility, and fickle winds are all minute per level spells that require standard action to cast. Mirror image and invisibility are defeated absolutely by true seeing. Mirror image falls victim to a flurry of attacks from any target (even a weaker one). Mirror image depends on probability breaking your way and is not an absolute defense.
All of these spells can be waited out or dispelled. None of these protect against sudden attacks, area of effect attacks, gaze attacks, or anything similar that does not require an attack roll. All of them can be overcome even in the absence of true seeing or see invisibility.
Of course you *could* try dispeling those, but thats a painful one at time thanks to the dispel magi nerf. Greater Dispel/Disjunction are thing here but at the level you are tossing Disjunction at a caster they are immune to it.
Let’s note that Spellbane is a spell unique to the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, not the Pathfinder Roleplaying game, and thus is probably not legal in many campaigns. Even within that setting it is obscure. The suggestion that it is regularly used by standard wizard and sorcerers is one that I find laughable on those grounds alone.
That said, even if you are playing in the PF setting and you do gain access to it, it is by no means an absolute defense against every attack, and per the way Anzyr uses it only protect you from having your other defenses disjoined – with the assumption that your existing defenses are unbeatable. I don’t believe your existing defenses actually will be unbeatable short of mage’s disjunction except (perhaps) in extremely specific circumstances for very limited periods of time when you have both the time and the resources to layer on vast numbers of defensive buffs for a single occasion.
Those people want to play E6 and should do so. Not pretend the difference between a level 1 Fighter and a Level 20 Fighter is more +hit and three more attacks if they don't move (or the same number of attacks if they do).
No doubt we should all change the way the game is played, because Anzyr has different expectations. Perhaps it would be more sensible to change your expectations or change the game you play Anzyr?
Because their caster counterparts go from neat tricks to telling reality to make them a sandwich and its only right that Fighters should get a similar scaling with level.
I think more appropriately stated, casters go from ‘neat tricks’ to ‘really neat tricks’, and martial characters go from slapping around humanoids and animals to slapping around beings of godlike power in 6-12 seconds. I don’t believe the power gained by primary spellcasters is (in the vast majority of games) nearly so great as Anzyr believes, nor do I believe that martial characters are nearly as weak as he suggests.
It is worth prefacing all of this by saying that Anzyr and I have gone round and around on these issues at least three our four times, so if it seems like we are touching on old bases, don’t assume you’ve missed something. It’s also worth noting that he and I approach the game from fundamentally different perspectives.
Typically his caster focused approach involves access to obscure spells, stacking of multiple spells from different sources, and robot-like regimens of spells cast each day in a specific order to achieve specific metagame effects. For example, stackings of various spells to achieve the most powerful possible use of spells like blood money as detailed here. He’s from the Character Optimization school that attempts to find the most powerful and questionable combinations and cracks in the rules. I am not. He has shown in the past that he adopts the most powerful possible interpretations of various spells and effects – regardless of direct developer feedback that outright contradict his interpretation (e.g. simulacrum).
My approach tends to focus on characters as they exist in a given world – e.g. as mortal beings with mortal goals, desires, and limitation. I play characters in the long haul with a highly experienced and extremely dedicated GM, and rather than attempt to create headaches for him I try to work with him to tell the stories we both want to tell. My advice typically assumes that if there are two ways to interpret things you will take the more reasonable of them, and typically is in line with developer comments.
Framed another way, he's the guy that is trying to build a car that goes as fast as it can regardless how much it costs and whether or not it is street legal, while I'm the guy trying to build a car that will get you where you are going at a reasonable speed and without breaking any laws.
With that said, any kind of understanding between Anzyr and I – or even a middle ground of...
Oh my where to start:
Well first things first: My cars are very street legal, they might go to fast for you to pilot, but they are very street legal.
Second: If you think Blood Money Simulacrums are my only tactic you are sorely mistaken and in fact neither of my level 20 casters relies on them. There's just no reason not have them outside my character carrying a planet sized idiot ball. Rest assured both casters even without Simulacrums (I'm not giving up my Blood Money Bloody Skeletons though, but I am willing to not utilize Bloody Skeletons being controlled via the Command Undead spell) can still absolutely faceroll anything remotely CR appropriate outside of another caster (which would still have to be played with atleast much casting system mastery.)
Third: Fighters are already breaking the laws of nature. 30 STR is not unreasonable for a Fighter to have and a STR that high would allow him move 1864 lbs. as a *light load*. Pick your favorite heavy object for him to effortlessly carry and tell me again why he can't smash walls effortlessly and leave craters in the ground (I'm no physicist, but assuming heavy load is the amount of lbs. of force this fighter could output 5,600 pounds of force being applied to ground which seems to me should get you some kind of area of effect). A fighter may be able to mince a pit fiend in 6 seconds, but you know who else can do that? EVERY OTHER CLASS.
Fourth: Sure some encounters will happen where minute per level buffs won't be available, but those are going to be fairly rare. Even at level 10, with extend spell these spells will last for 20 minutes (which is 200 rounds). You cast these before you enter the Citadel of Orm-Durak or before you go investigating the Cultist of Ythys. Do your dungeon explorations really take you more than a 100 rounds? Because I can't think of a single published scenario where that is the case (at least not that doesn't provide a rest break in between). Can these defense be overcome? Absolutely~! But while your trying to even get to play the "Whack the caster with a stick game" he's playing the "As the size of the explosion increases the number of social situations it can resolve approaches 0" game.
Fifth: Spellbane is published spell. Regardless of Golarion specificness (which isn't really a limit). Oddly enough my Spellbane actually does protect from Disjunction and most other forms of removing my buffs, though alas even with my increased CL I couldn't manage to get Disepl Magic (regular) on the list, so yes... opponents could remove the buffs... one per standard action. An additional if they can quicken it. They may get all of 2 buffs down before they die a horrible death. (that's being optimistic... realistically their getting 1 in a hypothetical surprise round).
Sixth: What part of Time Stop isn't telling reality to sit down and shut up for a few second? Turning yourself into pretty much anything with shapechange probably casually violates several laws of reality. And oh lord polymorph any object... thats gotta make mother nature wake up and go "What!?", Heck even Fireball doesn't care about your law of thermodynamics. Reality is suggested baseline for casters, not a hard limit like it is for Fighters.
Having GM'd several 1-20 campaigns, I can assure that some people can be blind to the gap for quite some time, but once they realize it they can't unsee it. It happened to a player of mine who was playing a Monk, though not until a fight with Azarathigaz, the Igniter of Heresy (Half-Fiend Red Dragon) and realized that he while he could fly, he would fall once he hit the antimagic field Azarathigaz had cast, while he had a back up bow, he didn't have the feats invested to make it useful and the chances of it significantly damaging Azarathigaz were extremely low, he was virtually guaranteed to avoid breath weapon damage, but considering that I play my high int monster like they have high int Azarathigaz was content to ignore him and instead focus on the Wizard who was sharing Polymorph Other with his Toad familiar, the incredibly large bears (one of which was also a full caster) and the Sorcerer who had luckily had lightning spells on his spells known, since fireball was really really not going to help. After this fight he realized this and since then has become a huge fan of Tome of Battle, which has helped him considerably. (3.5 Campaign)
I doubt its that we play different games, I just think you haven't played a game that went high enough to make the difference clear, or played with a caster who actually has some experience playing one at high levels. The difference while very present even early on can be hard to notice, took the monk over 13 levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The " Use Anti-Magic Field" argument always kind of amuses me, because it's flat-out saying that the best way to deal with high-level mages is with a high-level spell. Hmmmm....
The "Anti-Magic Field" thing is also pretty annoying because it's a blatant overcorrection. So instead of worrying about combats being dominated by high-level casters, let's just do what we can to take all magic out of the equation entirely. So, in theory, the caster is either crushing the encounter or is totally useless.
Don't get me wrong, AMF can make for some fun gimmick encounters, but any gimmick gets old if you over-use it. Every so often, it can be cool. But if my GM is throwing an AMF into every third combat, I'll probably be taking him aside, asking him what the deal is with the frequency of anti-caster encounters, and ask him to knock it off.
It's not even like AMF even "balances" anything. After all, if the GM wants to get you then they'll get you every time. It just comes across as a lazy catch-all plot device for nerfing casters completely since it's too hard to think of situations that a full caster actually can't get around.
Heck, after the 5th or 6th AMF, I'd probably just have my wizard walk out of the range, teleport away, and ask the group to call me back when there's an encounter I'm supposed to be able to contribute to.
No doubt we play different games – and there isn’t anything wrong with that. My games tend to include a higher frequency of very dangerous and potentially lethal encounters. My gm enjoys throwing fantastic odds at the party and forcing them to find a way to overcome them. In the last major story arc the (14th-15th level) party found themselves at various times…
-Locked in antimagic rooms with no gear at the end of an adventuring day that had already included four or five encounters. The walls were walls of force. They were forced to escape, then battle through an forty or fifty room keep against spellcasters, golems, clockwork enemies, mi-go, Hounds of Tindalos, and more within the space of a single night. If I remember correctly before the end of that day the party had fought through something like twenty or twenty-five encounters. The final encounter was a mass combat against an 11th level wizard with ~500,000gp in wealth, a 13th level wizard powered up at the seat of her power, a number of iron golems, something like twenty 5th level wizards, and half a dozen maguses of between 10th and 15th level.
I honestly find it hard to believe your group fought through these with no magical support and no gear. No gear against a ton of enemies with DR, and no magic against those f%@+mothering teleporting, hasted, turning invisible, Fog Cloud tossing buttmonkeys known as Hounds of Tindalos (among other things) is a bit of a tall order when you're naked and provoking AoOs for each attack, unless your party size is much larger than normal.
Tell me the whole story? I'm pretty interested now.
-Fighting through a trap door to a ~40ft by 40ft. floor area with a mix of monstrous humanoids defending it. That floor was surrounded by a spiral staircase all the way to the top three levels high (e.g. looped three times) packed with more monstrous humanoids. In total there were probably 70-80 enemies on the board. Every one benefited from blur (weak brutes in the 7-10 HD range – approximately 40 in number), many had mirror image and blur (weak brutes armed with wands – approximately 15), and several had greater invisibility, blur, and mirror image (high level rogues – approximately 15). At the top of the staircase was a powerful wizard who was also raining down spells and had similar defensive buffs. In the middle of the battle enemies slain before (including a scaled down gibbering orb and four advanced / giant stone golems) reanimated and attacked the party. This battle was not the climax of the adventure and was in the middle of a day that had already included ~9-10 combat encounters.
-Battling against a high level mythic cleric, a mythic rogue wielding a dagger that inflicted vile bleeding wounds, a mythic defender, a couple monsters with huge reach, and a pair of haunting built cursed runes that sprayed a mix of enervation, waves of fatigue, finger of death, and feebleminded at the party each round. Oh, and they were all invulnerable until specific changes were made to the environment. And halfway through the fight the GM threw in a demilich that got what was functionally a surprise round on the party (including a wail of the banshee that hit almost the entire party).
But I really must ask, what's the point of all this? It doesn't really prove any sort of point in the discussion, and doesn't really prove your GM is good (but doesn't label him as bad, either), just that he knows how to overload an encounter with powerful or numerous enemies. It seems like dangerous and potentially lethal encounters are already very achievable with intelligent use of less or less powerful enemies, why is all this required when intelligent use of all these factors should result in a party wipe (having to make multiple save or dies a round while enemies stall you and high level casters bombard you will eventually wear down even the most prepared and tactically skilled party just through sheer force of probability that you'll fail at least one of those.).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I highly doubt any caster person is arguing against certain spells being nerfed (Looking at you Simulacrum.)
Heh, this seems like a decent time to dig up an old thing. I've acknowledged many times the sheer power of simulacrum on the forums a few times, but when my good forum-friend Wraithstrike said he wouldn't mind a better (more balanced) version I presented this:
School illusion (shadow); Level sorcerer/wizard 7
Casting Time 12 hours
Components V, S, M (sculpture of the target plus powdered rubies worth 500 gp per HD of the simulacrum)
Range 0 ft.
Effect one duplicate creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance noSimulacrum creates an illusory duplicate of any creature. The duplicate creature is partially real and formed from clay, ice, mud, sand, snow, or stone. It appears to be the same as the original, but it has only half of the real creature's levels or HD (and the appropriate hit points, BAB, saving throws, feats, skill ranks, and special abilities for a creature of that level or HD). You can't create a simulacrum of a creature whose HD or levels exceed twice your caster level. A creature familiar with the original might detect the ruse with a successful Perception or Sense Motive check (DC 10 + caster level of the simulacrum spell).
If a creature casts spells as a class (such as a dragon casting spells as a sorcerer), then the duplicate casts spells at half that level (so a duplicate of a creature with 12 HD who casts spells as an 8th level sorcerer would have 6 HD and cast as a 4th level sorcerer). If the creature has spell-like abilities, the duplicate's caster level with those abilities is halved. In addition, the duplicate cannot use any spell-like abilities that mimic spells that wouldn't be available to a spellcaster with caster level equal to the duplicate's HD x 1.5 (so a duplicate with 10 HD loses access to any spell-like ability that mimics a spell requiring a 16th or higher level caster). If the original creature possessed Spell Resistance, the duplicate's spell resistance is reduced for each HD fewer than the original (so a 10 HD duplicate of a creature with 20 HD would have spell resistance equal to the original creature -10).
The duplicate creature retains gross physical characteristics of the original creature, including natural attacks, natural armor, size, ability scores, and traits based on its type (such as construct or undead traits). If the original creature possessed any of the following special abilities or attacks, the duplicate does too: Ability Damage or Drain, Amphibious, Bleed, Blindsense, Blightsight, Breath Weapon (halve any damage dice, to a minimum of 1 die; i.e. 6d6 becomes 3d6), Burn, Change Shape, Channel Resistance, Constrict, Curse, Damage Reduction, Disease, Distraction, Energy Drain, Fast Healing (equal to original's fast healing or 1/2 the duplicate's HD, whichever is less), Fear, Flight, Frightful Presence, Gaze, Immunity, Light Blindness, Light Sensitivity, Paralysis, Plant Traits, Poison, Pounce, Powerful Charge, Pull, Push, Rake, Regeneration (a duplicate instead gains Fast Healing as noted above), Rend, Resistance, Rock Catching, Rock Throwing, Scent, Spell-like abilities, Spell Resistance, Stench, Summon, Swallow Whole, Telepathy, Trample, Tremorsense, Trip, Vulnerabilities, Web, and Whirlwind.
At all times, the simulacrum remains under your absolute command. No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner (but a simulacrum will not harm you). A simulacrum has no ability to become more powerful. It cannot increase its level or abilities. If reduced to 0 hit points or otherwise destroyed, it reverts to clay, ice, mud, sand, snow, or stone and melts instantly into nothingness. A complex process requiring at least 24 hours, 10 gp per hit point, and a fully equipped magical laboratory can repair damage to a simulacrum. Spells that heal damage are only half as effective on a simulacrum. A limited wish spell may be used to heal the simulacrum of 10 hit points per caster level.
The thing is, the vast majority of spellcasting was already universally nerfed from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
I would wholly support that version of Simulacrum and while is still really quite good (I'm not sure the SR halving is needed actually), but a fixed list of abilities (and clarification on how Fast Healing/Regeneration interact) goes a ~long~ way to cleaning it up.
A real quick note while I'm here on the nerfing that PF did. In a surprisingly high number of cases I find the nerfs to ultimately work out in casters favor. The Mind Blank/Protection from X nerf ultimately helps out the casters for example.
I would wholly support that version of Simulacrum and while is still really quite good (I'm not sure the SR halving is needed actually), but a fixed list of abilities (and clarification on how Fast Healing/Regeneration interact) goes a ~long~ way to cleaning it up.
A real quick note while I'm here on the nerfing that PF did. In a surprisingly high number of cases I find the nerfs to ultimately work out in casters favor. The Mind Blank/Protection from X nerf ultimately helps out the casters for example.
I agree, but I actually appreciate those changes because I like more dynamic encounters. I feel like Pathfinder did a wonderful job lowering the ceiling and raising the floor. I'm someone who prefers resistance over immunities. I like that one spell doesn't invalidate an entire school of magic for example (now if we could just get death ward to not completely immunize you to all negative energy effects).
I like Pathfinder because the top end got lower, but options got wider. To me that makes for a much better game.
I would wholly support that version of Simulacrum and while is still really quite good (I'm not sure the SR halving is needed actually), but a fixed list of abilities (and clarification on how Fast Healing/Regeneration interact) goes a ~long~ way to cleaning it up.
A real quick note while I'm here on the nerfing that PF did. In a surprisingly high number of cases I find the nerfs to ultimately work out in casters favor. The Mind Blank/Protection from X nerf ultimately helps out the casters for example.
I agree, but I actually appreciate those changes because I like more dynamic encounters. I feel like Pathfinder did a wonderful job lowering the ceiling and raising the floor. I'm someone who prefers resistance over immunities. I like that one spell doesn't invalidate an entire school of magic for example (now if we could just get death ward to not completely immunize you to all negative energy effects).
I like Pathfinder because the top end got lower, but options got wider. To me that makes for a much better game.
I don't know. . . they nerfed several of the classic Save or Die Spells for apparently no reason, then immediately added Suffocation and Mass Suffocation which are even more difficult to counteract/ resist.
I don't know. . . they nerfed several of the classic Save or Die Spells for apparently no reason, then immediately added Suffocation and Mass Suffocation which are even more difficult to counteract/ resist.I would wholly support that version of Simulacrum and while is still really quite good (I'm not sure the SR halving is needed actually), but a fixed list of abilities (and clarification on how Fast Healing/Regeneration interact) goes a ~long~ way to cleaning it up.
A real quick note while I'm here on the nerfing that PF did. In a surprisingly high number of cases I find the nerfs to ultimately work out in casters favor. The Mind Blank/Protection from X nerf ultimately helps out the casters for example.
I agree, but I actually appreciate those changes because I like more dynamic encounters. I feel like Pathfinder did a wonderful job lowering the ceiling and raising the floor. I'm someone who prefers resistance over immunities. I like that one spell doesn't invalidate an entire school of magic for example (now if we could just get death ward to not completely immunize you to all negative energy effects).
I like Pathfinder because the top end got lower, but options got wider. To me that makes for a much better game.
I won't pretend there's not a lot of crap in the expanded material. I do think Pathfinder the core game is pretty solid. I make no apologies for the piles of expanded content. Rather I'd merely recommend exceptionally good content, like Dreamscarred Press' psionics rules.
Things to tend to be nicer when you ignore the crap.
Personally I'd prefer it if casters could cast more spells, but had to be significantly more specialized. It's just kind of overwhelming how they get access to every tool.